It astonishes me that the $10 million spent on the media campaign by Amendment 66 supporters did not deliver a victory. Indeed, Amendment 66 was soundly rejected by Colorado voters. The advertisements focused on returning music and physical education to the schools. In my nine years of public education, those classes have always been available to me. The campaign should have focused on how the money raised from the additional taxes would have been used to fund new programs and innovations in education. The advertisements lacked any definition of accountability, which will not be tolerated by taxpayers in these rough economic times. Amendment 66 experienced a crushing defeat because the campaign did not clearly define for voters what benefits they would receive from their $1 billion in new taxes.

James Schreiner, Lakewood

This letter was published in the Nov. 10 edition.

You get what you pay for. Colorado voters just agreed to maintain a mediocre education system, especially in our more rural areas. I am greatly disappointed and embarrassed by this result. Businesses will be reluctant to relocate here with our lack of commitment to a well-educated workforce. Our teachers, who have done an admirable job with marginal resources, grow weary and discouraged with this palpable lack of support.

I know folks want to keep our taxes low, but we’ll end up paying for our weak education system with increases in unemployment, law enforcement and prisons.
This is a sad day for Colorado.

Roger Overbey, Littleton

This letter was published in the Nov. 10 edition.

Our entire electoral process is in danger of being bought and paid for by big-monied special interests, or so we are told. How, then, to explain the resounding defeat of Amendment 66? Money advantage: 20 to 1 in favor of supporters. Final vote tally: 2 to 1 in favor of opponents. This, in spite of every education special interest you can name lined up behind Amendment 66.

The lead-up to Election Day and the very clear result call into question both the perceived power of money as the absolute arbiter of electoral success and the legitimacy of progressives who evidently want to keep the Koch brothers’ money out of politics while letting Gates and Bloomberg money in.

George Zepernick, Denver

This letter was published in the Nov. 10 edition.

With Amendment 66 losing so dramatically, there are two overriding lessons about how to win any vote in future elections:

1) Do not spin. We, the people, are tired of spin and half-truths. Fact checks of claims and accusations better prove out.

2) Do not be ambiguous. There is no trust in any vested interest to take the actions claimed in ads. We need clarity of purpose and guarantees of implementation.

We have all been educated by the school of Washington politics for too long and will not be fooled by partisan rhetoric.

John M. Movius, Highlands Ranch

This letter was published in the Nov. 10 edition.

When I saw Wednesday’s front page with the photo of Amy Oliver Cooke celebrating so joyously at the defeat of Amendment 66, I felt sick to my stomach. Who is this woman who is so intent on defeating this amendment? How could anyone be so happy that our schools are not funded? How could anyone celebrate that we have to have class sizes of 25-30 kids? Then I looked up her name — it turns out she is a bigwig with the Independence Institute.

It would have been in better taste to put a “regular” Colorado citizen on the cover of the newspaper, not a paid political operative who has a financial incentive to defeat this bill.

As a mom with kids in the public schools, I am saddened that this has been defeated when our school budgets have been gutted. And to see someone so happy at the expense of kids makes me sadder.

Kim Nelson, Fort Collins

This letter was published in the Nov. 10 edition.

For information on how to send a letter to the editor, click here. Follow eLetters on Twitter to receive updates about new letters to the editor when they’re posted.

Roger write that “Colorado voters just agreed to maintain a mediocre education system…” On the contrary, Dougco schools are being very innovated, and successfully so, with the money they have. And my county, Jeffco, has voted in board members who will probably institute some of the ideas they glean from Dougco. Education in CO has a bright future if school districts will abandon the old ways and be innovators like in Dougco and Jeffco. Hopefully, the teachers unions will help, not harm, innovation.

CathyinCO

Well said!! I have a daughter in a Douglas County school, and I am extremely satisfied with the quality of education she is receiving. I have no problem with additional funding for the right reasons, but nothing in this bill was really the right reason for me to vote for it

Dano2

So you want some more sugar to send her to a religious school?

Best,

D

CathyinCO

Could you try to post something that actually makes sense??

MORON!!

thor

What a dumb reply. Are you so invested in failing schools that you would respond to someone who is satisfied with the results of the new direction their school system is taking like a punk? Get real, not everyone who likes innovation wants to send their child to a private school.

toohip

It’s not a “dumb reply,” thor, when this is a published agenda of DougCo schools and THIS re-elected school board, that vouchers paid for by tax payers can be used by DougCo parents to send their schools to private religious schools.
And professional educated free-thinker that you are, explain to us what a “failing school is?” Is it the one that has teachers enrolled in (gulp!) teacher unions? Or one with teachers who have due process to keep from arbitrarily being fired like a fast-food workers, which is how you want to pay and treat teaches?
You and your ilk an claim to be “education reformers” and “pro-education” but your actions speak to your words, and while you may not want to send your kids to a private school, or can afford it, keep remembering that union you belong to and what they have given to you, starting with some job security! Taking away this same union support from teachers, is a little hypocritical, isn’t it?

CathyinCO

Oh good grief, it was definitely a stupid reply. More “sugar” to send my daughter to a “religious” school?? What did that have to do with my post?? Absolutely nothing.

And it also had nothing to do with unions, which you seem to be obsessed with

I’d rather

toohip is a moron.

thor

What makes it dumb reply is the condescending tone.Cathy made a simple statement. You could not read ANYTHING into it, unless you are a committed lefty.

TH, teacher’s unions ONLY guarantee security for teachers, through tenure, and equal pay for all teachers, regardless of performance. Students deserve better. That’s why pay for performance is working so well in Dougco. Now, about public vs private unions, do we have to go over that again. Why is it so hard for some people (your ilk) to understand it is not in the public interest for unions to be formed to pay public employees. Public employees can vote for those, in this case a school board, who pay their salaries. That’s why unions pour so much money into elections, to sway the vote. (This time it (gulp) didn’t work.) So, no, it isn’t hypocritical to take away unions from a public institution. You do it to free the school system to do things that help the students.

peterpi

So maybe your employer ought to disband the Teamsters local to free itself to help its customers and owners, eh? Plus, your employer can have “pay for performance” for its employees.
Funny how, all of a sudden, that doesn’t work.
You’ve amply displayed, over and over, that you don’t like unions — except your own local.

thor

Oh, I’m not a fan of my own local. I took the job and HAD to join the union. It frustrate me daily that I don’t get paid for performance. Not to brag, but there are people at work who are not nearly as good at the job as I am. But they get paid the same. My only consolation is that my boss can give me more stops. But even though it gives me more pay, I get commission plus a base if my sales aren’t high enough, I also work a longer day. I’m confident that if we dropped the union tomorrow, my pay won’t go down and may go up due to performance.

peterpi

I thought Colorado didn’t have “closed shops”.
You had to join the union as a condition of employment?
I’m asking honestly, clearing up my own impressions.

thor

First, let me tell you what I think about unions in general. My understanding of history tells me that unions were very much needed at one time. There is no doubt that big business did what they wanted, at one time. But like with regulations, unions are no longer as important as they once were. There are too many watch dog groups to need so many regulations, and there are too many employers who must pay competitive wages for many computer related jobs so that unions are obsolete for the most part.

Now, its my understanding that I can pay dues, but not pay initiation fees. I didn’t want to go through the hassle, but maybe I should have. I would look it up to be sure.

peterpi

I appreciate your comment.
I still think unions keep companies honest.
There’s nothing preventing companies from trying to circumvent or bypass regulations, or trying to repeal them.
Big business and big government need big labor as a counter-weight.
Not to mention some people want to eliminate numerous regulations.
And, if we make government smaller, that merely increases the need for unions to keep companies in check.

thor

All of those points are somewhat valid. I still think watch dog groups help keep companies in check, but you may be right about unions and pay. But I will, along with FDR, never bend on my opinion of public sector unions.

peterpi

I just remembered something:
In Colorado, after a company’s workers vote to form a union local, a second election is then held to see if the workers want a “closed shop”.

thor

You could be right. Go Broncos!!!!!

peterpi

I’ll drink to that.
They’re going to need all the support they can get during the next three games.
That was a great exchange of views with you.

peterpi

What makes [edited] Dano’s “sugar” comment a dumb reply is … that it was a dumb reply.

thor

Actually, it was Dano’s sugar comment. And he didn’t have the courage to defend his remarks.

peterpi

Thanks. I corrected it.

Dave52

Gee. If every school district in the state had the same funding per-student as Douglas County schools, then we wouldn’t be needing this sort of legislation. Send your kid to a school in the southern San Luis Valley or some similar depressed rural area, and get back to us.

CathyinCO

First of all, you might want to do your homework before making such a remark. From the state, the Center consolidated School District (San Luis Valley) received $7404 per pupil from the state, while Douglas County received $6219. These are 2012-2013 dollars. There are many school districts that receive far more than Douglas County on per pupil funding, but not too many that receive less. As a matter of fact, I could not find one that received less dollars. Add to this the fact that underperforming school districts tend to earn more from the Federal Government in additional funding than counties like Douglas. In 2010-2011, Denver County received $2274 in Federal Funding per student. Douglas County received $591. So, you are going to have to excuse us for not wanting to spend even more money outside of our county to fix what is not our problem. Because so far, these additional dollars haven’t worked so well, have they?

Dave52

My kids are in one of these rural school districts in SW Colorado that have seen per-pupil funding drop steadily for the past 8 years. We no longer offer 4 years of foreign language, just two – Spanish and French. You need four to get into a selective college or university. But thats ok, right? My kids can always attend some community college. No skin off your nose.

We no longer offer art or music in elementary school, and the middle and high school programs have been cut by 2/3rds. We are now at the point that if some kid wants to attend college, the necessary math, science, english and history courses are only offered one class, one semester a year – love the choice.

As for the school district in Center, and others in rural areas, you might have a look at the size of the district and imagine what it must take to bus the kids to school. As an example, in my district, the furthest out kids ride 90 minutes on the bus each direction. I don’t think you have that problem in Douglas County. When the price of diesel goes up, we lose two teaching positions. And then you might want to look at the maintenance costs of dilapidated vs newer structures. And you will find that the tiny districts, the per-pupil costs are quite high – because of necessary infrastructure.

Oh, the average teacher salary in Douglas County is $51,838. In my district? $37,458. We don’t have no stinkin’ union, we don’t have an excessive bureaucracy, we don’t have some massive sports program – our coaches earn $500 a season – we have to spend it on stuff like busing and heating the schools. You think maybe you attract a better quality teacher with your salaries and efficiencies? We haven’t given a raise in 5 years, and cut actual teaching staff every year now, and we have a 20% annual turn over as they head for greener pastures.

Oh, and with the economic collapse and the subsequent large decline in property values here, our property taxes are going down, meaning even less for the schools.

Of course, where you live, that isn’t a problem. Unless you like living in a country with educated people.

For the record, I thought the backers of 66 did very poorly, and should have gone directly a state sales tax increase, and better defined where the money would be spent.

CathyinCO

Actually, it was a bad bill. Taxpayers from three of the lowest funded school districts, Jeffco, Douglas, and Boulder Valley, would have provided the lions share of the revenue from this tax, while receiving anywhere between 50-57 cents return to their respective school districts, again, the lowest in the state. So the funding disparity would have grown even larger. And some spent on programs that, IMHO, were ridiculous.

Very nice that you provide busing for students in the school district. In Douglas County, if you want to ride the school bus, you pay for it. A flat fee regardless of how far you are from the school. It wasn’t always that way. it was just one of the changes the school board felt was necessary in order to keep more money in the classroom.

There are ways to address some of your problems at the local level. Your property taxes are going down at a time when your schools are suffering? A tax increase on your next ballot might help. Some problems are best addressed at the local level.

peterpi

Sounds like you want each and every school district to fund itself.
Jefferson County has 540,000 people. Denver city and county (they’re the same boundaries) has 600,000 people.
Center, Colorado is split between two counties. Rio Grande County has 12,000 people. Saguache County has 6,300.
It’s all fine and grand to cry in your beer about how the per-pupil funding is higher, but the fact of that matter is, there are subdivisions within subdivisions of Jefferson County that have more people than Center, Colorado and its surrounding population.
The people and businesses of rural Colorado can’t support what they have. They have infrastructure that is falling apart.
I have no problems with wealthier, more population-dense areas helping out
But, if you want to subscribe to “My school district’s fine, you take care of yourself!”, I can’t help you.

CathyinCO

Excuse me, but just where in my comment did I indicate that I want “each and every school district to fund itself”, because I never said anything like that. I was merely pointing to the fact that you already get more per pupil funding than any of the counties that I mentioned, and you still want more.

You want to point to all the populations in these larger counties, but with those populations come schools, teachers, maintenance, and a whole host of other costs that far exceed what your school district sees. And then we can look at the chronic and continual drain on school funding….the District of Denver. Good money after bad, and they can never fix the problem. Why?? Because as much money as you might poor into a classroom, you can’t fix families. I am not using a broad brush to paint all Denver as bad, but as much money as the state pours into there, nothing seems to change.

When was the last time there was an initiative on your ballot that attempted to address the lack of money your school district has?? I really have no idea. My point was that an attempt should, at the very least, be made to address some of your issues before you ask for help.

What would have been really interesting would have been to drop this comprehensive nonsense and put each individual initiative on the ballot alone. There were parts that, IMHO, were worthy of additional thought. And a constitutional amendment where the legislature could just vote to increase it more?? No thank you.

And just as an FYI, I am not the one crying in my beer over per pupil funding. I was just sticking to the facts. And maybe give you some more information as to why our counties said NO to this massive tax hike.

peterpi

I appreciate your reply, but I may have caused you misunderstanding. I live in Denver. But the plight of rural school districts has been around a long time.
Regarding local rural districts asking for tax increases, they may have reached a point of diminishing returns. They may be already at a property tax rate that the local economy can support.
As far as my stating you want each and every school district to fund itself, you’re the one who stated that Jeffco, Boulder Valley, and Dougco provide tons of taxes while getting little of it back. That sounds like you’d rather have each district fund itself.
In fact, if you think Denver could probably pull more of its own tax weight, I might agree with you. I’d agree that Denver is in a better position to do that than rural districts are, because there are more taxpayers in Denver.
Plus, I feel it is simply a fact that larger school districts can absorb some costs better than smaller ones. Building a new school for a larger school district has a smaller overall impact on the total school budget than it does for smaller school districts.
Everyone loves to loathe Denver Public Schools, and the district is trying to get its act together, but I bet Denver’s poverty rate is higher than your county’s.
I absolutely agree with you that Amendment 66 should have been a series of ballot proposals. Spot on! Then everyone would have had a chance to look at the income tax increase, the proposed two-tier increase, the proposed fixed budgetary requirement for school funding, the proposed reallocation of state funding towards rural schools. Instead, it was “all or nothing”, and the voters said “Okay, nothing!”

CathyinCO

My bad, Peter, I thought I was still responding to Dave…LOL!

What I said about Douglas and the other Counties is that we currently have the lowest per pupil funding in the State, and this initiative would have increased the disparity in funding, while getting a lions share of the revenues from these three counties. You can’t expect three counties that already receive less than they contribute to continue to bear the lions share of the burden for the state’s education system. I am extremely happy with DougCo schools, and feel fortunate to live here. Personally though, I would like to see a bit more funding per pupil and more pay for teachers, but I would also prefer that we handle it at the local (County) level.

I did notice that Denver voted in some reform candidates for the BOE. I am sure they will be taking a look at the reforms implemented in Douglas County. What is working for us won’t always work for Denver, but I am sure some of them will apply. And you have it wrong, it isn’t Denver County schools in general that people loathe, but education begins at home. The family unit has to be fixed. Teachers do their best, but if nothing is reinforced at home, it will be a lost battle, no matter how much money is thrown at the problem

Dave52

As for local ballot measures to raise property taxes for schools. There have been several tries over the past decade, they’ve all failed.

Property taxes in rural Colorado take on a different shape. To begin with, well over half the county is Federal or Tribal land and not taxed – we may get PLT payments if we’re lucky, but that goes into the general county fund, not the schools.

Secondly, there is a Colorado Constitutional Amendment that has some formula that shifts half the property tax onto businesses, not individual owners, and as such we don’t get much support from them – with reason, they’re competing with Walmart. And there aren’t very many businesses to begin with, so they take on a much heavier burden than one would think.

Third, this is the part of the country where a lot of people lost their ranches and farms during the Great Depression due to non-payment of property taxes, their land gobbled up by a few big land owners for the taxes. There is still a lot of simmering, generational resentment with that, and a gut reaction reason to keep property taxes really low.

Finally, there are an awful lot of retired people living in their homes on meagre fixed incomes, and a $200 increase in property taxes is a major hit.

There has been a bright glimmer of hope, a year ago the district passed a bond issue for a BEST grant award for a new high school – we only pay half the cost of a turn-key, state of the art high school.

Unfortunately, that has nothing to do with teacher salaries, increasing staff back to minimum levels, replacing 15 year old text books, and so on.

toohip

ouch! reality bites!

Dave52

Yes, my reality is that my kids’ school district – as many in the state – is grossly underfunded, I’ve watched over the past 15 years as it has rapidly declined and now the kids are not coming close to getting a competitive education, and nobody much gives a hoot.

peterpi

Thank you.
Too many urban people don’t want to understand just how badly off rural school districts are.
I strongly feel Amendment 66 was not the answer, but we do need to help each other out.

Robert Chase

“Roger write [sic] that “Colorado voters just agreed to maintain a mediocre
education system…” On the contrary, Dougco schools are being very
innovated [sic] …”

“Well said!!”

Sure, with an edumacation like that, the sky’s the limit. An American President once said: “Rarely is the question asked: “Is our children learning?”” — in Douglas County, they are asking that question.

thor

But in Dougco, the children will learn to ask: “Are our children learning?” Why? Because the teachers now have incentive to teach well. Like Danny De Vito said in Romancing the Stone, “Money talks and bull shirt walks.”

toohip

What “incentive” do the teachers have to “teach well?” The risk of losing their jobs? Your way or the highway? What expertise do you have, thor, in evaluating whether teachers “teach well?” Just more “wannabes” second-guessing the professionals who taught them how to . . . second guess. biting the hand that fed you.

peterpi

Spot on!
“The firings will continue until morale improves!”

guest

Spot off!

The other teachers know who the ridge runners are and firing them actually would improve morale.

toohip

The question in DougCo. . “have you got your teachers under control?”

toohip

“Dougco schools are being very innovated,”. . .buwahahahaha! Let’s see how this “experiment” plays out! Other than an anti-teacher union and anti-teacher agenda, I don’t see any innovative methodology to improve education when you bash the very instruments of education. . the teacher!

thor

Sigh, sigh, sigh, sigh. (Is that enough sighs?) Your reply, which I’m not sure you will read my reply nor respond to, shows convincingly how close-minded you are and how jealous you must be of an open-minded conservative. Now, on to important things.

Anti-union, yes, I’m anti-union. But the Dougco school board isn’t, necessarily They just told the union- bye bye. We don’t need you. I know in a liberal mind, that translates to anti-teacher. The problem is, in Dougco, teachers are rewarded for doing a great job. In the union system, teachers are rewarded regardless of the job they do, thanks to tenure. If rewarding teachers for great work is anti-teacher, bring it on.

You obviously haven’t followed this issue very well, or you would know that test results have gone up in Dougco. This can’t happen if the teachers are feeling like they are being bashed. Pull up your pants and do some real research into the Dougco testing results before you “bash” innovation.

primafacie

If it’ll make you feel better, Ms. Nelson, photographed in the paper and with these letters are political operatives with a financial incentive for passing the amendment looking glum.

And to see someone so unhappy at the defeat of huge income-tax-rate increase built into a multi-layered and misguided constitutional amendment makes me, well, I feel fine.

peterpi

Ms. Nelson says she had to research the woman in the photo. That’s odd: I thought the caption below the photo clearly identified Ms. Cooke as being with the Independence Institute.
People who win political campaigns are always going to look happier than people who lose them. That shouldn’t come as a surprise to a woman old enough to have kids in school.
Amendment 66 was overblown, complicated, and indeed, multi-layered.

primafacie

It appeared to be an attempt to get a multi-tiered rate system, hoping to use school funding for a sympathetic outcome.

peterpi

It was that,
and a state constitutional mandate for budgetary spending levels
and state constitutional performance standards
and state constitutional reallocation of school funding funds
and … and … and …
Individually, I might have agreed with some of these, but not chiseled in concrete cluttering up the state constitution.
Plus, if someone tells me “all or nothing”, I’m free to say “nothing”.

primafacie

10-4.

primafacie

10-4.

Robtf777

The One Big Problem with Amendment 66 was that it asked voters to throw an additional almost One Billion Dollars into a system that a lot of voters no longer have complete faith in.

The……correlation…..with Other Government Institutions…..is obvious.

When the media reports the “red ink” the USPS has…..many people simply say “Close it.”

When the issue of TSA Agents being shot and desiring to be armed was raised, at least one wrote a Post to “Disband the TSA entirely.”

A LOT of people would like the IRS eliminated……and/or the DEA……and/or the ATF……and/or the Border Patrol……and/or “borders” at all.

Likewise…….there are those who look at Government Public Schools with the same questions……and who look at the continual questions about School’s Performance…..the continual asking for More Money For Schools…….and wonder if we are throwing good money at a bad problem……trying to prop up a failing Government Institution……and trying to prop up a Failing Liberalized Education Institution and Agenda………

…………and wonder if other alternatives simply make better sense.

peterpi

Hmmm, I don’t like the US government faith-based non-profits initiative. Abolish it.
I don’t like the Department of Defense. Let’s slim it down. I mean, how many silly ol’ aircraft carriers do we really need? They are sooo World War II.
I don’t like the NSA snooping on Americans. Close it.
The Commerce Dep’t? Why can’t businesses promote themselves with their own dollars? Shut it down!!
I don’t like the House of Representatives. Have it declare a recess until the next general election.
Gee, Robtf, this is fun!
Regarding the USPS, which I happen to think does a reasonable job, if you think UPS, FedEx, or DHL will deliver first-class mail at anything other than their current commercial rates, you’ve been smoking — non-tobacco-derived products.
And I suppose if we close the public schools, why, Christian schools will be glad to convert — oops, I mean, educate, them, right?

gofastgo

Written words by a liberal, notice it didn’t say the Senate, also ‘happens to think the usps does a reasonable job’ $6 Billion in losses last year suits him just fine. Please start paying attention to other than msnbc.

sodakhic

Our kids have been indoctrinated with liberal think for the last 50 years, give me a Christian school anytime.

Fowler

All those people who are glum and embarrassed about our education spending might consider moving to places where people really know how to spend money on education, like Washington D.C.. NOT GONNA HAPPEN.

bob walters

the message that was sent loud and clear is that colorado will no longer be extorted by public unions. we will no longer let them tell us what they will be paid. paying bad teachers more and more money does not improve education at all just look at california for a perfect example , some of the highest paid teachers in the country , billions in unfunded pension liabilities and a dropout rate that exceeds 40 percent. that would send a lot of teachers packing if it werent the unions defending loser bad teachers

toohip

Dear Bob. This is NOT about “public unions.” This is not about “bad teachers.” This is not about “pension liabilities.” This is not about “teachers.”
This is about the education of our future. I realize it’s not black and white enough, or you’re too cheap and greedy to pay for “someone else’s kids,” but while we can agree and disagree about “how” the $ is spent, to simply play the obstructionist game (again). . and “just say no.”

thor

Wrong, wrong, wrong (sigh). If its about education in the future, then Gougco is the model. You need to pull up your pants so that you can get a clear view of what’s happening in innovative school systems.

gofastgo

Hoorah for innovation and less taxes. The ‘business as usual’ doesn’t work. America pay more per child on education than any other country in the world, but rank about 25th in education. Doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results must stop, this was a brilliant first step.

Kim Nelson asks: “How could anyone be so happy that our schools are not funded?”

Did I miss something? Did the Grinch sneak in while we weren’t looking and steal all the money from our school districts? Please! Our schools are still funded. They just won’t be receiving an *additional* $BILLION dollars this year, much of which was earmarked to benefit the unions and bail out PERA.

Ms. Nelson goes on to say: ” It would have been in better taste to put a “regular” Colorado citizen on the cover of the newspaper…”

By “regular,” you wouldn’t mean “liberal,” would you? It isn’t a matter of “taste.” The story was about voters defeating a tax and spend initiative by a two-to-one margin. So who should be on the front page? The losers?

toohip

I don’t think Kim Nelson was stating an absolute about funding schools, but rather why we’re not supporting additional funding of schools. But as a rightie, it’s easier to speak to absolutes, in a world of black and white you live in.

And to be outraged because a photo of a right-winger from the Independence Institute celebrating the amendment’s demise, is not to be necessarily construed as mean spiritness. I recall the right’s anger at any photo or misconstrued headline. . they are the Kings of feigned outrage! Remember when Rolling Stone put a “pleasing” picture of one of the Boston bombers on the cover? Just one of the usual feigned outrages from the right.

I’d rather

You are a moron. That picture on the cover of Rolling Stone should upset most every American. Even the five term democratic Mayor of Boston wrote the magazine and said, “Your August 3 cover rewards a terrorist with celebrity treatment. It is
ill conceived, at best, and reaffirms a terrible message that
destruction gains fame for killers and their “causes”.

Papa Smurf

It boggles the mind… I was responding to *what* she said, not what you *think* she meant.

I still think there’s nothing wrong with those who have won looking happy… and by extension, those who lost looking… shall we say, somber?

Silly me.

peterpi

I always thought winners of elections looked happier than the people who lost.

toohip

There are some good points here with these letters about Amendment 66 without all the usual phony criticisms. One observation that big money is not longer buying elections is a hope that many have been looking for, and it gives hope against the “buyers” of change or staying the course, be it Koch Bros. or Bloomberg. One lesson is you can pump money into a cause you support but pumping money to stop change, like gun control, is something that raises hackles.
I think James Schreiner hit on a reality that Amendment 66 didn’t really get down to the fine details of what this huge tax raise would pay for. Education tax amendments usually fare well, because of the general good cause of “education,” (well to some except the usual suspects), but this was a huge tax raise, and not a lot of obvious bang for the buck. I held my nose voting for it, and my retired teacher wife I think voted against it because of the huge amount going to teacher accountability and charter schools.
Mr. Movious (or “Strip” as he’s know by his friends), also points to the “spin” we often see with proposals, without the substance we really want. A full discussion of this Amendment was missed, and I don’t recall the Post doing an objective analysis covering the realities and allegations from both sides.
So is it back to the drawing board, or have the pro-educators blown this first moment.

Suvkix

Sorry Kim and Roger. The data does not back up your claims. The schools are adequately funded. Dumping more money into the system won’t fix the issues. Innovations and expecting more from the teachers and system we have may work. We know the system we have had for 40 years hasn’t. And we spend way more than we ever used to on a per capita basis and adjusted for inflation.

holyreality

I’m glad it lost, not because I’m a tightwad too selfish to give money for education.

I’m glad it lost because the voucher marauders will not have that available to pillage.

I voted it down because schools don’t teach independent creative thinkers, they produce obedient workers just smart enough to do the job, but too dumb to see they are screwed. Schools teach that the Authority determines their fate, that they are always watched, that they answer to a bell.

If schools actually produced intelligent free thinkers, who know what the difference between a scale and chord is, the fibonaci spiral, how to compute integrals and the elements of style, I’d be first in line to raise funds.

fanman

Kim Nelson writes, “How could anyone celebrate that we have to have class sizes of 25-30 kids?” I attended elementary and junior high school in two middle-class districts in suburban Pittsburgh during the 1950’s. Class sizes in all those years were in the 25-30 range, with an average of about 28. One year, a brand-new elementary school was used entirely for seventh grade because of over-crowding in the only junior high school. Somehow, I was not scarred for life.

tomfromthenews

I have stayed away from discussion of this because it has
been so depressing.

I can only speak from my own experience, my own life and
career. But as a recent retiree, I
saw the job I loved for so many years descend into a mire of uneasy
dissatisfaction in the final decade or so.

Once, teaching was about passion combined with expertise and
a love of kids’ learning. I came
to school every day with something vital to impart, something exciting to give,
and with an anticipation of student engagement and dialogue. I was left relatively free to infuse my
life experience as a lover of writing, reading and speaking with the important
touchstones of the curriculum requirements. Those requirements were clear and important but I was
allowed a lot of room as to how my students and I reached them. Demonstration of college-ready skills
was absolute and expectations were high, but because they were MY lessons, I
obviously had more personal buy-in and students could tell we were on a special
journey together. (Think Robin
Williams in “Dead Poets Society” before the system drove him out.)

What’s changed?
I think it was the adoption of CSAP and other required standardized
testing that initially dulled the blade of meaningful teaching and
learning. I found myself attending
more required “team meetings” of educators where the dreaded “guaranteed viable
curriculum” model was slithering into my professional world. Education “reformers” were now in
charge, both in the school district and the legislature, demanding that my
colleagues and I teach the same limited set of materials at roughly the same
time so that any student from around the district could be “plugged in” to my
classroom at any given time from another school and be learning roughly the
same thing they had been at their previous school. No real teaching required, they were cogs to fit into the
almighty juggernaut of public education that spit out minimally qualified
college recruits.

When it came time to retire, the accompanying feeling was
one of relief that I had “made it” rather than the difficult decision I had
hoped it would be. I would have
loved to have stayed on for a few more years, meeting fresh young faces and
introducing them to the words of Shakespeare or Dickinson or Poe, not because
it was Week 4, Day 3 of the Big Box of Curriculum, but because the person at
the front of the room leading them along the path was a 55 year-old with the
energy and enthusiasm of a 21 year-old.

The defeat of Amendment 66 was no big surprise to me. Rarely in the past 30 years has public
education been “adequately funded” with many a mill levy election going down
and many class sizes too large for students to be ideally taught. We have always been told to do more
with less and, in my experience at least, I was usually able to do that as long
as my hands were not tied too tightly.
The infusion of more Douglas County style “reformers” into my old
district (Jefferson County) has left me distinctly blue. I hope my former colleagues can
continue to do their jobs and keep their spirits up in spite of the deluge of
opposition which is sure to come their way.

Guidelines: The Post welcomes letters up to 150 words on topics of general interest. Letters must include full name, home address, day and evening phone numbers, and may be edited for length, grammar and accuracy.